IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ecl/stabus/3032.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Parade of the Bankers' New Clothes Continues: 23 Flawed Claims Debunked

Author

Listed:
  • Admati, Anat

    (Stanford University)

  • Hellwig, Martin

    (Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods)

Abstract

The debate on banking regulation has been dominated by flawed and misleading claims. The title of our book The Bankers New Clothes: What's Wrong with Banking and What to Do about It (Princeton University Press, 2013, see bankersnewclothes.com) refers to flawed claims about banking and banking regulation, and the book discusses and debunks many of them. Flawed claims are still made in the policy debate, particularly in the context of proposals that banks be funded with more equity and rely less on borrowing than current or new regulations would allow. Those who make the flawed claims do so without addressing our arguments, even when they comment on the book or on our earlier writings. Because the financial system continues to be dangerous and distorted, however, flawed claims must not win the policy debate. This document provides a brief account of claims that we have come across since the book was published in February, 2013. We provide brief responses, with references to more detailed discussions in the book and elsewhere. Nothing that we heard or read changes our conclusions or our strong policy recommendations.

Suggested Citation

  • Admati, Anat & Hellwig, Martin, 2013. "The Parade of the Bankers' New Clothes Continues: 23 Flawed Claims Debunked," Research Papers 3032, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
  • Handle: RePEc:ecl:stabus:3032
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.gsb.stanford.edu/faculty-research/working-papers/parade-bankers%E2%80%99-new-clothes-continues-23-flawed-claims-debunked
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Philipp König & David Pothier, 2014. "The Bank Capital Debate: Should Fragility Be Reduced?," DIW Roundup: Politik im Fokus 17, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ecl:stabus:3032. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gsstaus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.